Income Gap Widens

[Partial]

According to the stats in the article I(We) would classify as wealthy. Whoopee.
Sat. I did the grocery shopping.......when I came home I told me husband I am so glad that we only have one daugher still living at home......5 bags of groceries= $283.00. To eat healthy, it is expensive. Very expensive. I don't know how families with multiple children at home do it.
$283....and not one thing that was precooked, a mix, a snack in a box or bag......I even bake my own bread. Vegetables and fruit were the bulk of my purchase. I just don't know where this will all lead.............or end.

You're crazy. Eating healthy is far cheaper than going out getting fast food or frozen pizza. Not everything has to be organic or soy, ya know.

Since when are eggs, frozen broccoli, some turkey breast, etc expensive?!? That is certainly cheaper than the frozen pizza.

[Harlan Huckleby]

And in any case, it doesn't take specialized training or unusual knowledge to debunk this report. See my post above. Any person who knows about financial matters can understand how cynical and misleading this study is.

I haven't read your long post yet, am setting aside a hour curled up in front of the fireplace with my cocoa. I will get to it. This report has been out for 3 or 4 weeks, it appears to have been summarized and repeated in every media outlet on the planet. If it were as flawed as you state, there would be debunkings by the conservative think tanks and newpapers. Maybe they are out there, I don't see them.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Re: Income Gap Widens

They are looking at a few discrete three-year periods. The periods I'm focusing on are the second and third periods---1998-2000 and 2004-2006..... the data would almost certainly show that incomes for the highest earners went down from the period 1998-2000 to the period 2004-06. This would have been unacceptable, so they decided to just leave out

Oh come on. You're speculating.

This is a junk study by biased researchers

We're comparing a peer-reviewed study to your back-of-envelope analysis. I'm not dismissing your opinion because you are wrong, but because I have no way of judging it. And the more forcefully and definitively you state your conclusions, the less credibility you have, because you are not being realistic about your own limits in understanding all the technical issues.

[packinpatland]

According to the stats in the article I(We) would classify as wealthy. Whoopee.
Sat. I did the grocery shopping.......when I came home I told me husband I am so glad that we only have one daugher still living at home......5 bags of groceries= $283.00. To eat healthy, it is expensive. Very expensive. I don't know how families with multiple children at home do it.
$283....and not one thing that was precooked, a mix, a snack in a box or bag......I even bake my own bread. Vegetables and fruit were the bulk of my purchase. I just don't know where this will all lead.............or end.

You're crazy. Eating healthy is far cheaper than going out getting fast food or frozen pizza. Not everything has to be organic or soy, ya know.

Since when are eggs, frozen broccoli, some turkey breast, etc expensive?!? That is certainly cheaper than the frozen pizza.

I agree with you.....but you can't eat that every meal.....or would kids want to.
And I wasn't comparing it to going out to eat.
There wasn't one thing in my grocery bags that was 'organic' (fresh doesn't mean organic) or soy.
Partial....let's talk after you've got several kids sitting around your table.

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Income Gap Widens

On the contrary---as I stated above---including capital gains would almost certainly narrow the gap between top and bottom incomes, going from the period ending in 2000 to the most recent period ending in 2006, since capital gains were almost certainly a lot lower in the later period. .................................................. ...............................................

No valid conclusions can be drawn from it, except that people will believe anything if it supports their world view.

Very thoughtful post, and a fine use of critical thinking to arrive at your own conclusions instead of just blindly accepting what was written.

I'd only add this. Who cares about the "gap"? My financial performance relative to Bill Gates is hardly a measure of my financial ability to survive a recession. I should be comparing my income against what it was, and what it will take to survive a recession. I consider this article inflammatory, and designed to galvanize those who blame the wealthy for the current situation.

Extremely unhelpful finger pointing - which is where we'll always find Harlan.

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Income Gap Widens

Harvey,

What revisionist history book have you been reading to claim that Reagan "did wonders for the middle class." The reverse was true.

One of the first things he did as President was to fire all the federal air traffic controllers who went on strike.

As a former Air Traffic Controller and dues paying member of NATCA, I can assure you with 100% confidence - those assholes totally had it coming to them. I worked with and was friends with many strikers who later crossed picket lines. Reagan's heroic stance protected millions of other middle class workers and 100's of millions of middle class Americans from the 10,000 controllers whose illegal actions can only characterized one way - extortion.





On August 3, 1981 nearly 13,000 of the 17,500 members of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO) walked off the job, hoping to disrupt the nation's transportation system to the extent that the federal government would accede to its demands for higher wages, a shorter work week, and better retirement benefits. At a press conference in the White House Rose Garden that same day, President Reagan responded with a stern ultimatum: The strikers were to return to work within 48 hours or face termination. As federal employees the controllers were violating the no-strike clause of their employment contracts. In 1955 Congress had made such strikes a crime punishable by a fine or one year of incarceration -- a law upheld by the Supreme Court in 1971. Nevertheless, 22 unauthorized strikes had occurred in recent years -- by postal workers, Government Printing Office and Library of Congress employees, and by air traffic controllers who staged "sick-outs" in 1969 and 1970.
Negotiations between PATCO and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) began in February 1981. PATCO president Robert Poli demanded an across-the-board wage increase of $10,000/yr for controllers whose pay ranged from $20,462 to $49,229; the reduction of a five-day, 40-hour work week to a four-day, 32-hour work week; and full retirement after 20 years service -- a package with a $770 million price tag. The controllers argued that they deserved these considerations due to the highly stressful nature of their very important work. The federal government balked at these budget-busting demands of more money for less work, well aware that other federal employees were likely to take action to improve their lot if PATCO succeeded. The FAA made a $40 million counteroffer which included a shorter work week and a 10 percent pay hike for night shifts and those controllers who doubled as instructors. Further negotiations between Poli and Transportation Secretary Drew Lewis sweetened the pot even more. Nonetheless, 95 percent of PATCO's membership rejected the final settlement. The FAA began work on a contingency plan that would go into effect if a strike occurred.
Designed to take place during the busiest time of the year for airlines, the strike threatened major carriers like Braniff, Eastern, American and TWA, who reported losses of $30 million a day during the strike. These companies had been counting on a summer surge in business to offset losses due to fare and route deregulation which had spurred the growth of new, smaller carriers that effectively competed with the giants. Concern grew regarding the extent to which the strike would impact business and the economy. Air transportation was a $30 billion-a-year business; every day 14,000 commercial flights carried 800,000 passengers -- 60 percent of them on business trips -- while 10,000 tons of air cargo was transported daily. Airlines employed 340,000 people and revenue losses due to the strike forced some to resort to layoffs and management wage cuts. The fresh fruit, fresh flower and fresh fish markets depended on swift air transport, as did other industry in need of spare parts, health care services for blood supplies, and the financial system for paper fund transfers. But other businesses prospered thanks to the strike -- among them Trailways and Greyhound, the Amtrak rail service, and car rental agencies, as travelers sought alternate means of transportation.
To the chagrin of the PATCO strikers, and the surprise of nearly everyone else, the FAA's contingency plan functioned smoothly, minimizing the strike's effects. Approximately 3,000 supervisors joined 2,000 non-striking controllers and 900 military controllers in manning airport towers. The FAA ordered airlines at major airports to reduce scheduled flights by 50 percent during peak hours for safety reasons. Nearly 60 small airport towers were scheduled to be shut down indefinitely. The FAA's Oklahoma City training school, which normally produced 1,500 graduates per 17-21 week course, considered plans to increase that matriculation number to 5,500. (More than 45,000 people applied within four weeks of the strike's onset.) PATCO strikers made dire predictions about reduced air safety as a consequence of the 60-hour work week put in by their replacements, but in fact limited traffic and the extra monitoring efforts of the 33,000 Air Line Pilots Association members diminished the risk of an "aluminum shower," as controllers euphemistically called an air accident. Before long, about 80 percent of airline flights were operating as scheduled, while air freight remained virtually unaffected.
There wasnt much support for the PATCO strikers. The public sided with the government and exhibited little sympathy for individuals whose earnings were already well above the national average. AFL-CIO president Lane Kirkland accused Reagan of "brutal overkill" in firing the strikers, and another union leader complained that the president was engaged in "union-busting," but pilots and machinists continued to do their jobs in spite of the PATCO picket lines, while labor strategists criticized Poli for calling an ill-advised strike that damaged Labor's image. The International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers considered a boycott of U.S. air traffic to show support for PATCO, but it never developed. (Canadian and Portuguese controllers did engage in a two-day boycott.)
The federal dreadnought turned all its big guns on the hapless strikers. PATCO leaders were hauled off to jail for ignoring court injunctions against a strike. The Justice Department proceeded with indictments against 75 controllers. Federal judges levied fines amounting to $1 million a day against the union while the strike lasted. Over 11,000 strikers received their pink slips, while 1,200 went back to work within a week's time. Morale among the strikers was shaky. "I thought Reagan was bluffing," lamented one controller. In October the Federal Labor Relations Authority decertified PATCO.
Two months after the strike, a congressional committee report indicated that by January 1983 only two-thirds of the controllers needed for full and safe operation of air traffic would be in place, and recommended rehiring some of the strikers who had been fired. The administration curtly refused, and Transportation Secretary Drew Lewis declined even to meet with PATCO leader Robert Poli. By 1984 air traffic had increased by 6 percent while there were still 20 percent fewer controllers than had been on the job prior to the strike.
According to journalist Haynes Johnson, the decisive manner in which Reagan handled the PATCO strike convinced many Americans that he was "the kind of leader the country longed for and thought it had lost: a strong president" -- in sharp contrast to the widely-held view that Reagan's predecessor, Jimmy Carter, had been too indecisive. Reagan stressed that he derived no satisfaction from sacking the controllers. He pointed out that he was the first president to be a lifetime member of the AFL-CIO. And he was aware that PATCO had been one of the few unions to support his presidential bid. "I supported unions and the rights of workers to organize and bargain collectively," he wrote in his memoirs, " but no president could tolerate an illegal strike by Federal employees."

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Income Gap Widens

was during the Reagan administration that corporations began eliminating employee pensions.

And thank god they did. If GM had done so, maybe they wouldn't now start at a $3000 per vehicle cost disadvantage when competing with Toyota. There's no telling how badly this countries out of control unions damaged our country. There was a time when it was very difficult to tell the difference between organized crime, and organized labor.

Corporations should not be in the pension business. It led to unhealthy empleyee/employer relationships, and lifetimes of mediocrity for workers at a single company. Free agency in the workplace is a far better system, though cutting the corporate unbillical cord from the pension welfare mindset was a painful process.

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Income Gap Widens

When Reagan took office, our country had a budget surplus. When he left office 8 years later, our country had the biggest budget deficit in its history. Part of the deficit was due to the corruption in his massive military buildup. Have you forgotten how Defense companies bilked the government by charging $89 for a wingnut and $600 for a toilet seat?

Reagan's economic policies were hardly friendly to the middle or working classes.

I just couldn't possibly disagree with you any more. Reagan's military build up eliminated the greatest risk to this country that encompassed my entire childhood - the Cold War.

His economic policies set the table for the unprecedented economic growth of the 1990's. Reagan is one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

[GrnBay007]

Re: Income Gap Widens

designed to galvanize those who blame the wealthy for the current situation.

I don't blame the wealthy for the current situation nor do I have ill feelings towards them....although, I've seen people blindly fall into wealth that have never worked a day in their life after their mighty high school education and I will say I respect those people that worked their way to wealth much more.

Now, I'm curious. Since you made the comment above about "blame the wealthy for the current situation". Who or what is to blame specifically, iyo

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Income Gap Widens

designed to galvanize those who blame the wealthy for the current situation.

I don't blame the wealthy for the current situation nor do I have ill feelings towards them....although, I've seen people blindly fall into wealth that have never worked a day in their life after their mighty high school education and I will say I respect those people that worked their way to wealth much more.

Now, I'm curious. Since you made the comment above about "blame the wealthy for the current situation". Who or what is to blame specifically, iyo

I'm not saying you would blame the wealthy. I'm saying some would. Especially those pointing to the "gap" rather than a more meaningful metric.

Who to blame? I'd blame the mortgage industry for their responsibility for the housing collapse. Decades old rules regarding credit worthiness criteria just got thrown out the window, and created a super heated market - followed by the inevitable collapse. There are probably a bunch of suits who deserve jail time over this. But housing is only part of the equation.

Some of this is cyclical. Some of it may be related to the war. Some of it looks to me like our weakening ability to compete globally. Ultimately I think it's too complex to point fingers of blame. I'm not sure the blame game is a productive exercise anyway.

Better strap in, because I don't believe we've hit bottom.

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Income Gap Widens

....although, I've seen people blindly fall into wealth that have never worked a day in their life after their mighty high school education and I will say I respect those people that worked their way to wealth much more.

I had a friend from HS who made it big by the time he was 35. He was one of the poorest kids in our school, and had a chip on his shoulder that provided all of the motivation he needed to crush his competition and become wealthy. I'll never forget the first thing he told me after his net worth crossed into 8 figures - "it's a lot harder to keep it than it was to make it".

It makes sense if you think about it, and helps explain why so many lotto winners, athletes and other people who stumble into their fortune end up losing everything.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Re: Income Gap Widens

I consider this article inflammatory, and designed to galvanize those who blame the wealthy for the current situation.

Extremely unhelpful finger pointing - which is where we'll always find Harlan.

Facts are facts. It's possible that the authors of the report are brazenly dishonest as Idle suggests. I doubt it. You would need a debate between advocates *with experience in the nuances* to learn much more.

As far as "inflammatory" and "finger pointing", you don't get class stereotyping from me, ever. (You're the one who stigmatizes people working for $8/hour in box retail stores as incompetent.)

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Income Gap Widens

As far as "inflammatory" and "finger pointing", you don't get class stereotyping from me, ever.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.

[Partial]

Re: Income Gap Widens

designed to galvanize those who blame the wealthy for the current situation.

I don't blame the wealthy for the current situation nor do I have ill feelings towards them....although, I've seen people blindly fall into wealth that have never worked a day in their life after their mighty high school education and I will say I respect those people that worked their way to wealth much more.

Now, I'm curious. Since you made the comment above about "blame the wealthy for the current situation". Who or what is to blame specifically, iyo

Irresponsible people.

[oregonpackfan]

Re: Income Gap Widens

was during the Reagan administration that corporations began eliminating employee pensions.

Corporations should not be in the pension business. It led to unhealthy empleyee/employer relationships, and lifetimes of mediocrity for workers at a single company. Free agency in the workplace is a far better system, though cutting the corporate unbillical cord from the pension welfare mindset was a painful process.

While their were some abuses by unions, they were designed to protect the rights from abuses by their employers.

The elimination of pensions by corporations is one indicator where loyalty between employer and employee has been badly eroded. Do you think employees are going to work to their maximum when employers callously regard them as expendable?